1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Report: Newspapers, websites lack diversity

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by dcdream, Apr 28, 2011.

Page 2 of 4
  1. KJIM

    KJIM Well-Known Member

    So sick of "lack of diversity" meaning white male.

    Diversity is FAR more than gender or the color of one's skin.
     
    KJIM, Apr 29, 2011
    #13
  2. clutchcargo

    clutchcargo Active Member

    This kind of statistical analysis is misleading in that its implications of discrimination somehow suggests there is one racially- or gender-biased central committee or one big shot making all of the hiring decisions for the 320 media entities surveyed. In fact, it is 320 individual entities each making their own hires separate from one another, each free to choose whoever they believe is the best candidate separate from whatever rationale/criteria the other 319 are using.

    So, basically, this CF Institute assigns a grade of C-plus/F to all 320 entities surveyed, essentially meaning EACH of the 320 gets a C-Plus/F. C-Pluses/F's across the board. That stinks - not the grade so much, but how everyone gets lumped together.

    In a sense it's like the annual stats about the percentage of minorities coaching in the NFL. Even though the league now, rightfully, mandates at least interviewing one minority each time there is a head-coaching vacancy, the decision each time ultimately rests with the owner, who can hire whoever he or she chooses. Each of the 32 owners paid hundreds of millions of dollars to have that right of hiring autonomy. No one owner is responsible for how those coaching stats pan out each year in terms of what the other 31 teams do.

    Ditto for the 320 publishers.
     
    clutchcargo, Apr 29, 2011
    #14
  3. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Amazing how controversial that statement is to some people.
     
    outofplace, Apr 29, 2011
    #15
  4. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    If the playing field were level, and it's not not, this wouldn't be a topic. It's sad that in 2011, it remains a problem.
     
    Drip, Apr 29, 2011
    #16
  5. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    See what I mean?
     
    outofplace, Apr 29, 2011
    #17
  6. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    It is what it is. In my opinion, in 2011, to still talk about this crap is stupid.
     
    Drip, Apr 29, 2011
    #18
  7. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Tell that to the Gannett papers.
     
    Baron Scicluna, Apr 29, 2011
    #19
  8. armageddon

    armageddon Active Member

    The playing field IS level. You just can't see it.
     
    armageddon, Apr 29, 2011
    #20
  9. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    IF the playing field was level, this wouldn't be a topic.
     
    Drip, Apr 29, 2011
    #21
  10. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    It's more like the playing field has been leveled to make room for a Starbucks.
     
    dixiehack, Apr 29, 2011
    #22
  11. Batman

    Batman Well-Known Member

    I feel like I'm watching two people argue what came first -- the white chicken or the brown egg.
     
    Batman, Apr 29, 2011
    #23
  12. playthrough

    playthrough Moderator Staff Member

    It's a topic to the institute that releases the study. I don't think it's an everyday topic in newspapers.

    And I'm still trying to make sense of this Lapdog quote:

    <i>"When survival is at stake, like it is for so many places, I think the danger is that things that will be of long-term importance are less of a priority than say, keeping the economy of a newspaper going," said the study's primary author, Richard Lapchick. "I think it happens in all kinds of businesses … The old saying of last hired, first fired is still too much at play."</i>

    I don't disagree that long-term issues are important for any business, even a struggling one, to keep an eye on. But, um, yeah, keeping the economy of a newspaper going right now is pretty goshdarned important.

    And instead of "last hired, first fired," is it better that newspapers first cut every veteran staffer who actually has institutional knowledge and the community's respect? If he thinks there's just too much old-man white dead weight, just say it and cut the crap.
     
    playthrough, Apr 29, 2011
    #24
Page 2 of 4
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page